Tracker policy concern

Archive User Feedback
1

I had a bug report closed on me by @dfelinto because I didn’t get around to responding to @jacqueslucke for over a week, and the assumption was that my lack of response means somehow the problem is now gone(?).

I didn’t know this was part of the tracker policy, but it seems dangerous to assume a problem disappeared simply because the person doesn’t get around to responding for over a week.

To put in context of timelines:
I reported the bug on Dec. 11.
Jacques responded Dec. 29 (18 days later).
Dalai closed it Jan. 13 (15 days later).

I understand the need to close bug reports, but perhaps this one should be revisited. If the policy will remain, I’d suggest changing the reason. The current assumption that somehow the problem disappeared because the user didn’t get around to responding doesn’t seem to make sense at all.

Also, in cases like this where the problem itself was never truly discussed, doesn’t it make more sense to reopen the report and continue the conversation instead of cluttering the archive with duplicate reports?

Is there a policy of never reopening closed bug reports?
Needing to re-report the same bug is an inconvenience to the user instead of being able to just continue the conversation.

2

Actually, I usually say that people should reopen the report when the necessary information has been provided. So I agree with you.

Only when the original report was essentially lacking all information, I say that a new report should be created, because the old one does not contain any value.

One benefit of opening a new report is that then all the information is available in the initial post. This makes it easier for other developers to understand what it is about, without scrolling down in the discussion. One could make it a policy that the necessary information should be added to the initial post as well.

1 Like
3

You are not alone, but unlike you I had to wait for months before one developer confirmed my reports then the second one came closed it & said it’s “working as intended” when clearly it’s an issue.

Now i have to argue about their importance, report over again and wait if they will get closed or accepted.

this is really fraustrating if the problem is not a " bug" as they define it but breaks users workflows and lower the expectations of our reports that might not be an importance to them.